Mandatory Sentencing - Coursework Example

Mandatory Sentencing Introduction Mandatory sentencing is a fixed penalty set by the legislature that s the minimum jail term, which has power to limit a jury’s final decision when sentencing a defendant (Sherman et. Al., 2008). Historically, all criminal offences drew a mandatory capital sentence and courts had no choice but perform as the law stated. However, with time, courts have been bestowed with a broad sentencing discretion to professionally assess the nature and extend of sanctions or penalties issued.

Law experts argue that mandatory sentencing play a critical role in crime prevention through incapacitation and deterrence. This is because mandatory sentencing acts like a standardized method of passing judgment that favor every person. In fact, it eliminates the sympathy factor.Basing on substantial research in the United States, especially in regions like Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, and Florida, mandatory sentencing has a little or no preventative effect because crimes happen even when the masterminds are still in prison.

In addition, mandatory sentencing is expensive and labor intensive (Zimring, 2004). This is in relation to housing the offenders, providing them with basic needs, providing security. In the United States, it costs up to $50,000 to take care of a prisoner in a single year, and approximately $300,000 to build a new prison cell.In my opinion, mandatory sentencing provisions are cynical. They can only be substantial in the hands of judges, who have a professional background in dealing with crimes.

Politicians use such policies to instill fear in people so that they can gain and retain political power, even when they do not deserve it.The Judiciary arm should be independent as possible. Interference by the Legislature deprives it of its authority to exercise power. All cases should be left for the courts to view and assess the causes, come up with evidence and give a legitimate conclusion. Mandatory sentencing gives rise to personal bias because the verdict is always given by the prosecutor, who may give low-level offenders a high level mandatory sentence due to personal indifferences.

ConclusionMandatory sentencing is a good weapon in reducing crimes and boosting community well being. This is very effective especially where people illegally use guns or other public threatening weapons without prior permission. However, it deprives people of their human rights since some may receive unfair judgment especially if not listened to or when their cases are not investigated into.ReferencesSherman, L., Gottfredson, D., MacKenzie, D., Eck, J., Reuter, P.& Bushway, S. (2008), “Preventing crime: What works, what doesn’t, what’s promising: A report to the United States Congress”, seehttp://www.ncjrs.org/works/index.htm.Zimring, F. (2004). “Making the punishment fit the crime: A consumer’s guide to sentencing reform” in A Reader on Punishment, eds A. Duff & D. Garland, Oxford University Press, Oxford.